Is Barney getting squeezed out of the Cubs lineup?

Is Barney getting squeezed out of the Cubs lineup?
Is it time for Darwin Barney to move on?

UPDATE:  2:15 PM Since writing this piece, I've been told to expect that the 3B job will to go to Mike Olt as long as his shoulder is ok and he can make the throws from 3B.  The  Cubs are preparing to start him there very soon this spring.  I've also heard that Renteria wants to add speed to the roster, so Bonifacio is looking good for a spot.  I've learned too that a lot of teams coveted Bonifacio because of his clubhouse presence and aside from his on-field skills, that trait makes him a good fit for a team like the Cubs who will be bringing up multiple young players to the majors in the near future.

While players like Javier Baez and Mike Olt looking like potential impact infielders and players like Emilio Bonifacio showing he can fill a specific niche for the team, one player who seems to be fading into the background is defensive wizard Darwin Barney.

Barney's defense has made him a nice fit on a staff that is being taught to pound the lower part of the strike zone and generate weak contact, but it's Barney's own weak contact that could start to become an issue.  His woeful wOBA of .252 last year is an offensive vacuum the Cubs may not be able to afford to carry much longer.

Still, if you would have asked me a a couple of weeks ago, I would have said that Barney was still the front runner to keep his job at 2B.

Now I'm not so sure.

There are several factors working against Barney right now as the Cubs look to upgrade their lineup for 2014.

The Bonifacio factor

While it's only spring, it seems that Barney is getting fewer and fewer reps at 2B.  He's played some SS while Bonifacio has started most of the recent games at 2B.  And while Bonifacio is not going to match Barney on defense, he can add a dimension the Cubs don't have, and that is a top of the order hitter with speed and OBP skills.  With the exception of a half season last season, Bonifacio has been a pretty good table-setter type player.  If you take out his poor half-season with the Blue Jays, he has put up a .351 OBP with 86 SBs in 102 attempts (84% success rate) in 258 games over the past 3 seasons.

In that light, it isn't surprising that Bonifacio has seen a lot of time at the top of the Cubs lineup.  He can provide a spark at the top.  He isn't the defensive player Barney is, but his career -2.6 UZR/150 suggests he's at least around an average defender -- perhaps better when you consider that in his only full season at 2B (2011), he put up a very solid 8.3 UZR/150.

The Olt factor

Olt doesn't play 2B so why should he have any impact on Barney?  Well, Olt is hitting .333 with 3 HRs this spring and if his shoulder is healthy, he's a real threat to unseat the Luis Valbuena/Donnie Murphy platoon at 3B.  That, in turn, would either bump Valbuena into a utility role and/or put him in a position to challenge Barney for playing time, especially vs. RHP against whom Valbuena put up a respectable .331 OBP and hit 12 HRs last season.

As for his defense, Valbuena played well in just 40 innings last year at 2B  Overall he's been a below average defender at 2B in his career (-6.6 UZR/150),  However, Valbuena has improved a bit and has been at roughly -0.5 since that 2010 season over 719 innings.  Like Bonifacio, you can probably live with that considering he can add some offense to the position short term.

If Olt wins 3B, that gives the Cubs two 2Bs in Valbuena and Bonifacio who can provide better offense without hurting the team too much on defense. And the player who doesn't start would offer better skills off the bench (Valbuena as a LH hitter with pop and Bonifacio as a switch-hitter with speed) than Barney, who would become little more than a late inning defensive replacement.

The Baez factor

Of course, all of these solutions are temporary.  Sooner or later the Cubs are going to have to make a decision with Javier Baez, who is tearing up spring training for the 2nd straight year.  He's also coming off a season where he hit 37 HRs and absolutely destroyed AA pitching.  He's going to play SS at Iowa, but with Starlin Castro entrenched for the moment at SS, Baez's preferred position is 2B -- and with Olt playing as well as he has, you have to think the Cubs are going to be happy to oblige.

Even if the Cubs decide to move Starlin Castro, as Baseball Prospectus' Jason Parks alluded to yesterday on Twitter, the Cubs still have another top, near ready 2B prospect in Arismendy Alcantara.  Alcantara can add a dynamic offensive dimension to the position with his speed, OBP skills, and his ability to switch-hit.  He can also provide some solid pop while possessing a potentially above average glove for the position.

No matter what happens on Opening Day, it appears Barney's days as a Cubs are numbered.  His escalating salary will soon be too rich for a one dimensional player and so perhaps the Cubs best chance to extract value is this season.  A team such as the Yankees who have enough offense but are in need of better infield defense could be a nice fit in the short term.

Even if he isn't traded, the Cubs seem to be preparing Barney for a utility role whether it's now or sometime later this season.  He's played more SS this spring and while that is due in part to Castro's injury, it does appear that the Cubs are making a concerted effort to determine if he's a viable option there if needed -- if not for them, then maybe for another team.

Filed under: Uncategorized

Comments

Leave a comment
  • It's amazing the difference a year makes. It was just last January that Theo had Barney's name alongside Castro, Shark and Rizzo's as "core pieces." At the time I remember thinking that Theo was including his name strategically and with ulterior motives, but it's a shame his bat couldn't take a small step forward to where he'd at least have some solid trade value.

  • Last I heard TOR was needing a 2b....

  • In reply to TheMightyGin:

    Maybe we see a Barney and Samardzija package to the Jays

  • If I remember correctly, didn't Hoyer make a comment prior to last off season (or maybe the previous year) that Barney was a candidate to hit .300? I'm sure he's changed his mind on that in the last year. Anyway, hearing that Barney might get squeezed out of the starting lineup is one of the most encouraging Spring Training stories of the year!

  • In reply to DecaturCubFan:

    Maybe...though I imagine it'd be a pretty soft .300. I'm just speculating here though on Barney, the FO may think differently than me on this.

  • Hoosier, if you're out there, I know you had some comments in the old version. If you want me to go back and paste them on the new article, I think can do that on your next comment if you want.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    I thought you got mad and banned me.... j/k.

    What happened though?

  • Is Barney a victim of Sveum's ineffective offensive tinkering? He would not be the only one. If so, can Renteria and hios staff work with him so he can return to his 2011/2012 offensive production level? While not spectacular, his production those years was not bad. If he was able to recover some of his offensive ability, is he a candidiate to stick around?

  • In reply to All W Days:

    I'm not sure about that. There have always been questions about Barney's offense. He was pretty resourceful for that first season or so, but I think the league may have caught up to him

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to All W Days:

    Even in Barney's best year, 2011, in which he hit .276, his OPS was just .666, which was barely good enough for second worst among all MLB second sackers. So, even if he returns to his 2011/2012 form as you suggest, he'll still be woefully inept.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to All W Days:

    One thing about that from a eye ball stand point. He was visibly bigger when he came to camp last year. Probably 15 lbs heavier than he needed to be. Barney got a little pull happy in the spring and it carried over in to the season.
    His weak pop ups on balls that he should have been driving and slapping the other way may have been a direct result of the extra weight he carried.

  • fb_avatar

    D-Backs return Mateo.

  • In reply to Ray:

    I saw that. Mateo has a good arm, but I don't know if he'll ever throw with enough command to make it matter -- and he's not young anymore.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    You're right. I didn't realize Mateo was that old. He's actually approaching 30.

  • In reply to Ray:

    That's old in power pitcher years.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    Agreed, 30 is old for a power pitcher.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    John, I saw him last week in a game. He still has the same command problems hes always had. Him and Albert Cabrera both continue to frustrate fans like me, they have ability, but never seem to put it together.

  • Is 30 so old now? It doesn't seem right to write a player off at 30. The next time this comes up people will be saying 27 is old. For those of us outside the playing area it makes you almost feel ancient.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to pricewriter:

    Well, I'm 31, I don't feel old (most of the time). But, 30 is relatively old for a minor leaguer with career-spanning command issues, yes.

  • In reply to Matt McNear:

    Yes, well put Matt.

  • fb_avatar

    I have been reading this blog for about 6 months now and it is the absolute best thing I have ever found for a devout Cubs fan. Thank you! First time I have have commented on anything and I have a question, why are the Cubs so hell bent on keeping Castro at short? I know he has great potential but when are actions going to start speaking louder than potential with him? Love Castro, don't get me wrong, but it seems a lot easier to cover up a mental lapse at 2nd than it is at short. He has had several years to live up to his potential...

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Brandon Halford:

    What I don't understand is why some fans are so eager to move him off the position. Castro has twice led the league in assists, put outs and total chances. In 2012, he accounted for 134 more defensive outs than did GG winner Jimmy Rollins. I actually think it's a fair trade to get nearly an extra out a game in exchange for a few more errors and mental lapses. Keep in mind, the kid is not quite 24 and the glovework has gotten better over time. Ozzie Smith made 24 errors in his third big league season, and he was three years older than Starlin at the time.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Partipilo:

    In 2012 Phillies pitchers struck out 257 more batters than Cubs pitchers while facing 68 fewer batters. The raw putout numbers really tell you nothing.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Moody:

    In 2012, Cubs pitchers were below the league average in GO%, which tells me the kid has some very good range.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Partipilo:

    Or the reason they were below the league average is because he has less range than other shortstops and ground balls that would have been outs with the average shortstop went for hits with Castro. These raw numbers can go both ways.

    The advanced stats on BBR suggest that Castro was worth -2 runs compared to the average, which was actually slightly better than Rollins at -4 (a questionable choice for GG, even at the time). However, Ozzie Smith in his third year -- the one with 24 errors -- was worth 21 runs compared to the average shortstop.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Moody:

    Mike, I think that's silly. I actually thought you were going to go the other way on this and credit Dale's defensive shifts (which didn't exist in 2011 anyway)

    No offense, but please explain how he leads the league in total chances, yet the teams poor GO% is because he has no range. It doesn't work both ways.

    Honestly, I'm not looking to have this escalate and have John tug more of his hair out, so I suggest we simply agree to disagree here and move on.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Despite Castro's errors in 2012, his defensive war and other metrics show him as an average to above average defender at the position.

    And scouting reports as well as the naked eye show that Castro is more fluid than Baez and will likely maintain more range than him at the position in the long run.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    BBR shows Castro as 1.2 dWAR in 2012... I understand the other Mike's point... The lack of GO for the team was not due to Castro's range, especially when he led all MLB in total chances.

    As comparison, since we used Jimmy Rollins, he was a 0.0 dWAR player in 2012.

    Castro would probably be an above average 2B, but I don't see a better SS in the organization, especially since Castro has been improving his defense every year.

  • In reply to Mike Partipilo:

    Mike P, I agree I really like all these prospects but Castro is the only one to actually do it in the bigs. Lets not forget that Vitters is a career .300 minor league hitter (though he still could pan out) but he is yesterdays news.

  • In reply to Brandon Halford:

    Thanks Brandon. For the record I'm not hellbent on keeping Castro but I see no reason to move him either. The Cubs aren't exactly loaded with talent yet, so why give up on him now? If there comes a point where the Cubs have surplus MLB talent at SS and 2B, then you consider moving him to fill a need. Cubs are getting close to being in that position but not there yet.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Well said John. Mike & Mike can argue the extremes, but the reality is we don't have a better defensive SS right now. Baez, and no one on here has seen more of him over the last 5+ years than me, still has some wrinkles to iron out defensively. If we were loaded at the other positions, then Castro would need to fear Baez and his superior offense for similar defense... but that's not an issue for the foreseeable future.

    Baez does have better range than he's given credit for. And I believe all those throwing errors in Daytona & Tenn will not be the norm... So while I still believe he can stick at SS and be as good or better defensively than Castro... This FO has been adamant that Castro stays at SS and since they know more than me, and more importantly are the ones calling the shots.... he stays @ SS. I also think it's very, very unlikely we trade Castro in the next 3-5 years.

  • In reply to HoosierDaddy:

    And you're not even counting the fact that Baez is built like a 3B more than Castro, he will likely outgrow the SS position before Castro does, thanks to his thick extremities.

  • In reply to Brandon Halford:

    Welcome

    Cubs Den, can't beat it with a stick. Great Cub fans, up to date info, lots of coverage of the minor leaguers, a great leader in John, and no 15 year olds mucking up the comments. For a die hard cubs fan in Texas it is a god sent.

    As for Castro I sometimes forget he zipped through the minors and is still very young. Still time for him to mature on the field and I can't help but feel that someone who can hit .300 for two straight seasons suddenly forgets how to hit. I am looking for a big rebound this season and so is my fantasy team.

  • In reply to cubbybear7753:

    Thanks for the kind words. I appreciate that.

  • I like Bonafacio at 2nd and when Baez comes up if Lake is struggling
    Bonafacio can play CF and still bat leadoff.

  • ive siad it several times but i think it would make a lot of sense for the cubs to send barney to atlanta for a uggla plus a pitching prospect for taking on uggla's salary. the braves are now about 15 mil above there opening day salary from last year with the santana signing and im sure they'd love to subtract around 11 mil from that. uggla could be a change of scenery guy and the worst case scenario is us buying him out of his contract next year. theo has already said that they still have money to spend and i think this would be a good way of spending it.

    the best case scenario would be uggla having a sound first half and the cubs moving him to another team for depth at the deadline.

  • In reply to jshmoran:

    Uggly is worse than Valbuenna/ Murphy. Terrible defensively at either 2b or 3b, his BA is in Mendoza territory and hes worse than Soriano when hes on a cold streak. We had 31 hrs last year playing 3b with 4 different players, and any of them would be comparable to Uggly at 20% of the price. No to Uggly.

  • Hearing Olt has the job if his shoulder is ok,

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    I was wondering if last night basically cemented him at 3B....he was a very heavy favorite anyway, with Villianueva at AAA, it would have been difficult to send Olt down. He's 25, it's time for him to either make it, or not.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    Does he actually need to have some starts at 3B in ST/Iowa before he gets the job? Or is this just a matter of the doctors saying his shoulder is okay?

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Likely both and he's going to be playing 3B very soon.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Its not like he is learning a new position, or was bad enough defensively that he needs extra reps. I would imagine a week of work over there before the spring ends is all he needs.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Then let's hope his shoulder is OK,..... and 'we' can get on with figuring out how the 2014 IF is going to be assembled.

    After the last few years - I would happily take a good (perhaps excellent) defensive 3B guy who can hit 0.260+, take a walk, and smack 25-30 HR/year. Sounds a lot like what they had with Aramis Ramirez (although his defense was always a bit iffy), with a slightly lower BA.

    That - and Olt can cover 1B adequately and a corner OF spot in a pinch.

  • It struck me as obvious that Barney's versatility is being showcased at SS. They won't have this opportunity after the bell rings, and is also why they are "playing it extra safe" with Castro's minor hammy.

  • Also heard this: Renteria really wants to inject some speed to the roster. You have to think that bodes well for Bonifacio. He's a lock to at least make the team.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    It is also a pretty good sign for Lake starting the year as the starting CF'er and probably doesn't hurt Kalish's chances of making the team either.

  • In reply to JB88:

    Whether Lake does or not, he HAS to improve his K-BB% or he'll find himself in Iowa working on that by June...

  • In reply to JB88:

    I think so as well. I know Lake isn't ideal for their philosophy, but when he's locked in he makes things happen.

    I'd love to see Kalish on the team sooner rather than later. The only thing i can see holding him back is that he hasn't had a whole lot of reps the past two years. He may need some time to get his rhythm back.

  • John, Ive said you know the Cubs have progressed when the Barneys, the Valbuennas and the Murphys are playing somewhere else. If the prospects all pan out, AA likely becomes a utility player along with someone like Bonifacio, your starting OF is Soler, Almora and Bryant. If the NL adopts the DH, you keep Vogelbomb and rotate 1b and DH between him and Rizzo. The teams offensive future looks pretty good, considering that Baez, Almora and Olt are looking like they might just live up to there potential.

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    I think that's a pretty effective barometer. Looks like that scenario is going to play out soon. I can still see the Cubs taking chances on guys like Valbuena -- but for lesser roles.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    Darwin Barney and Valbuena are players that have value to a good team......in a bench role. I think both would be very good UT guys, and I can think of several playoff teams that would love to have either or both. The problem of course is that we've been using these guys as starters.......

  • I have no problem taking on Uggla's 11 million dollar salary as long as we get in return prospect worth worgh 11 million dollars.

    That would be equal to what? The top 4 IFA signings this year?

    I sure wouldn't take in return a guy with potential to be a # 3 starter at best.

    Or

    how about Barney for Uggla and Hayward (and their salaries)?

  • In reply to DaveP:

    I really hope that they don't take a flier on Uggla - even if as an end result they ship off Barney and get some other value in return.

    Uggla was even at his peak a defensive liability - and he's far from his peak. And unless something magical happens - his offense has slipped to the point where (other than smacking the odd HR) Barney might be a bigger offensive threat.

  • Apologies for being unrelated to this post, but I found Keith Law's response in his chat today about who could supplant Rodon at 1-1 due to his recent struggles with his fastball & command: "I don't think there's anyone who's clearly 1-1, but I think Rodon's been passed by a few guys. Could make a cogent argument for him to be behind any of Kolek, Gatewood, Jackson, Hoffman, Beede."

  • In reply to Da Ivy:

    I know one scout would agree. Called him the 4th best arm in the draft behind the 3 pitchers you mentioned.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Just shows how over valued/emphasized the current years results are. look at Stanek & Manaea... I think the Rays & Royals are quite happy with that. Or, us with P Johnson the year prior.... Then again, we're quite happy with Bryant and the Rockies seem to be thrilled with Gray.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    This is also why I don't like to speculate on the draft too much before it's time....too much can happen in a college season.

  • In reply to Zonk:

    To an extent, things do happen, but evaluations stay pretty consistent. Scouts have a pretty good idea who is good and who will be drafted where pretty early on in the process. Injuries can change things, but MLB evaluation personnel isn't as volatile with their opinions as most fans are. There will be changes, but it's not like the draft is going to be turned completely upside down. Most of it will go more or less to form.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Da Ivy:

    That could get interesting.

  • In reply to Da Ivy:

    I saw that, he is also not a fan of trea turner.

  • there were whispers that Rodon's shoulder wasn't 100% last season . Not sure how credible that info was tho. Cubs are in a good position at 4 , they will get an impact player , not worried with this FO making the pick.

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    Let him slip. Manea is looking pretty good in Kansas Citys camp after slippping last year. Stuff is stuff.

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    If you watch videos of all the top prospects, I think Kolek and Beede jump out the most. With his recent struggles and just watching him on tape, I'm not a huge fan of Rodon. If somehow either of Kolek or Beede fell to the Cubs, I would be a very happy man.

  • totally off topic.. whats up with sandberg/rollins relationship in philly? Rollins has been benched for like 3 games and sandberg keeps spitting out "no comment" as to whats going on?

  • I have no problems with Barney getting squeezed out. means cubs are putting better talent on th field. great stuff again John!

  • I assume we won't sell low on Castro but if Bonafacio, Kalish and Olt keep it up, what would that lineup look like vs LH or RH?

  • In a scenario where the Cubs break camp with six infielders, five outfielders, two catchers and 12 pitchers, then Bonifacio would be the fifth outfielder and seventh infielder. However, if the majority of Bonifacio's AB's are taken as the starting 2nd baseman, then having both Murphy and Barney wastes a roster spot. The fact Watkins has already been sent out is a strong indicator to me that Bonifacio is a lock for the 25-man roster and he would have to be added to the 40 man. So, if Sweeney sits vs. a lefty and Bonifacio moves to the outfield, would you rather give Murphy those AB's at 2nd or Barney? Also, this roster costs the last chance guys like Vitters and/or Jackson a shot. I would rather see Jackson available as a defensive replacement for Lake, then Barney available as a defensive replacement for Bonifacio.

  • In reply to Cleme:

    Bonifacio does give them a lot of options with regard to how they want to fill out their roster.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    I think Vitters and Jackson will be fine if they perform in Iowa the first half of the year. After that, they could take the spots of guys like Schierholtz or Murphy.

  • iowa will have a crowded outfield. with ha,szczur,silva,jackson,
    mcdonald & coughlin. then you have 4 other potential OF at iowa:
    watkins(also will play infield), vitters(mostly play 1B), kalish (will
    probably be in chicago), wells (will get cut?).

  • In reply to bleachercreature:

    I would guess some of those guys will either be cut or in AA.

  • In reply to Cleme:

    Well, here's the problem with keeping Luis Mendoza. vs. Barney Mendoza. OBP/OPS aside. Kottaras & Baker, whoever wins the backup C, are LH bats. Sweeney, LH bat. Kalish if he makes the team, is LH bat. That's already 3 LH bats on the bench. Ruggiano, is RH & will be platooned... when that happens, Schierholtz, LH bat added to bench. That's 4 LH bats on the bench not counting Luis Mendoza. Barney still plays a GG caliber defense at 2B & can play SS, as that was his natural position and is a RH bat.

    Take that for what it's worth. But barring a trade I think Barney is the backup utility player if he doesn't start at 2B because of the #s game. I think Donnie Murphy & Luis Valbuena are the odd men out. I could be wrong, but that doesn't happen to me very often.

  • If I'm not mistaken... Shortly after Renteria was hired, he personally requested speed, because he wanted to have speed in the team and atop of the lineup and I wouldnt' be surprised if once Bonifacio was made available that he was on Renteria's wishlist... I also wouldn't be surprised if Renteria calls Bonifacio as his preference for the 2B job.

    Let's be honest, no one is better than Barney defensively at 2B... But what do we need more right now, a defensive wizard at 2B or someone who can lead off, switch hit, run and play multiple positions (the latter comes in handy, especially after Baez gets called up to play 2B, or anyone else... Bonifacio is a candidate for the last man standing as he moves around basically anywhere, also comes in handy in case of an injury).

  • ". "Even though a lot of people say I was doing good last year, they were saying that because of the home runs. I can get better. I chased so many balls and I made a lot of errors. I realize I can do better.", Says Baez.

    OMG - we have a stud!

  • In reply to CubfanInUT:

    I agree with him, I love the homeruns as much as anyone but you need more contact. I love the homeruns in spring training a well but he is not going to face randy wolf or journeymen pitchers all the time. I am glad he recognize this and wants to get better.

  • In reply to CubfanInUT:

    That's an impressive thing to say... Shows his makeup is underrated... Take that, Keith Law!!!

  • fb_avatar

    Speed was a pretty cheap thing to add. Let's face it, they have to improve the offense. Lots of home runs last year- nothing else. I think Barney and Murphy are expendable. Cleveland just lost Giambi-I could see Murphy fitting there. How bout Barney to the Mets?

  • I'm pretty excited about Bonifacio @ 2nd, especially with Baez and AA waiting in the wings to take that position very soon. We simply don't have the MLB offense today that can trade offense for defense at the position. Maybe somebody out there has that luxury and would value his defense enough to make a move for him.

  • I really don't think Barney is really tradable for anything. He would be a backup somewhere and with his new Arb money he probably would be overpaid for that. I think if the Cubs want to package him with Shark and others they could free up more money for another IFA prospect or use it towards picking up a free agent in the future. The only way that changes is if he can surprisingly hit before the trade deadline and can be moved by himself.

  • I think Barney is valuable as a backup SS/2nd and agree if they package him with Schierholtz, Veras or Shark it would improve the return. My concern is if they need to free a roster spot sooner to bring Kalish, Olt and Boni...are we backed into a corner to accept a lower return?

  • In reply to rsanchez11:

    I'm thinking they may send Kalish down to start. With the versatility of Boni they may not carry as many outfielders.

  • In reply to CubsBuck22:

    I can definitely see that happening.

  • In reply to rsanchez11:

    Some think Luis Mendoza has more value than Barney. So he could be the guy who goes in a trade. I posted a little bit above why I think Barney stays at a minimum as the utility player. If we go by the predictions & #s, the bench would become very left handed. That is one of the reasons I think Barney stays, not to mention his stellar defense at either 2B or SS. That of course is on the condition they don't trade him. If they do, then I see Murphy hanging on.

  • fb_avatar

    If the new FO was able to get something for Campana, they can get something for Barney.

  • It's my opinion that Olt, Bono, & Kalish all make the final roster. They exemplify the direction the new coaching staff wants to go and I think it will send a message that this team is about to become younger, faster, and more powerful

  • Assuming Olt & Boni win out I have a couple of lineups using 2013 OPS splits/ ABs and a projection for Olt. I am not sure at all about the order.

    Player OPS Vs. RHP AB Pos Bats
    Bonifacio 0.680 99 2nd S
    Castro 0.635 498 SS R
    Schierholtz 0.799 409 RF L
    Rizzo 0.796 416 1st L
    Castillo 0.758 291 C R
    Sweeney 0.755 144 CF L
    Lake 0.692 175 LF R
    Olt . .682* ---- 3rd R

    Player OPS Vs. LHP AB Pos Bats
    Bonifacio 0.735 59 2nd S
    Castro 0.619 168 SS R
    Rizzo 0.625 190 1st L
    Ruggiano 0.833 133 RF R
    Sweeney 0.824 48 CF L
    Castillo 0.707 89 C R
    Lake 0.956 61 LF R
    Olt .682* ---- 3rd R

    Let me know where I'm wrong!

Leave a comment